Page 1823 - Week 09 - Wednesday, 18 October 1989
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
on fluoride was not drawn to our attention. In fact I was informed by the Chief Minister that she found very little to disagree with in our policies. I do not wish to score points off that. I simply observe the fact that there were no warning bells ringing from the Labor Party on this issue, just some confusion on the question of the type of consultation we should go into. The Rally, of course, adopted the idea that it should be removed first and then be subjected to consultation.
Finally, on the subject of consultation, we have seen daylight saving brought in without consultation with the Queanbeyan residents; we have seen a tax imposed on X-rated videos - a matter of wide public interest - without consultation; and we have seen the forcible removal of teachers who have served more than 14 years, dedicated teachers across the system in the ACT. More than 77 teachers are affected by that move, 30 of whom attended a protest meeting, four of whom saw Dr Willmot, but no action was taken to directly consult with them at a political level. So we all fall prey to lack of consultation. It was just too bad that fluoride found itself listed, with the able assistance of the Deputy Chief Minister, on a day that meant that we rushed into moving it to law.
Now I refer to a speech by the Chief Minister on 27 September. The Chief Minister said:
As I said before, I do not agree with the way in which fluoride was introduced to the water supply in the first place. Nobody would. It was done, in my view, without an adequate, open and consistent assessment of all of the issues at the time.
I draw to the attention of the Chief Minister the current state of the law. In the Electricity and Water Act 1988, section 62 states that where the Minister responsible - who of course is Mrs Grassby, but ultimately she is responsible to the Chief Minister - has reasonable grounds for believing that the supply of water is, or is about to be, so affected that there is, or is likely to be, a danger to public health, the Minister may, by notice published in the Gazette, declare that an emergency exists in relation to the supply of water.
I did inform the Chief Minister on Friday that she should get further legal advice on this issue. The fact is that ACTEW is obliged as one of its functions to ensure, as in section 6 of its empowerments, to "research, evaluate and participate in research activities with respect to matters arising out of or incidental to its functions". Other enunciated functions are to participate in setting the enforcement standards relating to water.
The costs of the experts that my colleague Dr Kinloch referred to - or was it my colleague Mr Moore - as aiding the current Social Policy Committee's review should not, in
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .